Attachment Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What is reciprocity?

A

Mutual responsiveness

When each person responds to the other and causes a response from them.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is interactional synchrony?

A

Rhythmic interaction between infant and caregiver involving mutual focus, reciprocity and mirroring of emotion/behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What are the 4 stages of attachment?

A

Asocial
Indiscriminate Attachments
Specific Attachment
Multiple Attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the asocial stage?

A

0-6 weeks, stimuli can cause a positive reaction, such as a smile.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is the Indiscriminate Attachment stage?

A

6 weeks-7 months, infants enjoy human company but have similar reactions to any caregiver.
They get upset if they aren’t interacted with.
After 3 months they smile more at familiar faces
They can be easily comforted by a regular caregiver

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the specific attachment stage?

A

7-9 months, special preference for a single attachment figure.
Baby begins to look for security, comfort and protection.
Begins to show stranger anxiety and separation anxiety

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is the multiple attachment stage

A

10 months+, baby becomes more independent and forms several attachments.
By 18 months a majority of infants have formed multiple attachments.
Attachments formed with people with most accurate responses to baby’s signals, instead of most time spent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Describe Schaffer and Emerson’s study

A

(1964)
They studied 60 babies at monthly intervals for the first 18 months of their lives.
All the children were studied in their own homes
Their interactions with their carers were observed and their carers were interviewed.
Development of attachment was assessed based on stranger anxiety, separation anxiety and social referencing.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Evaluate Schaffer and Emerson’s study

A

Low population validity as they all came from working class households in Glasgow. Also low sample size
Accuracy of data could be limited as social desirability would have impacted the mothers’ answers.
Lacks historical validity as it was conducted in the 1960s when gender roles were different.
Longitudinal study with cross sectional design. High internal V
Carried out in familes’ home- good eco V

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Describe the role of the father

A

In modern Western cultural there is now an expectation that the father should play a greater role in bringing up children.
Mothers are typically the nurturer while the father is the playmate.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Evaluate research into caregiver-infant interactions

A

It is hard to know what is happening when observing infants. Observers have to infer details about infants such as are their actions conscious.
Studies have high control. Often filmed for detailed analysis
Observations don’t convey purpose of synchrony and reciprocity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Describe the procedure of Lorenz’s research

A

He divided a clutch of goose eggs into 2 independent groups. 1 group hatched with the mother goose in their natural environment. The other half hatched in an incubator where Lorenz was the first moving thing they saw.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Describe the findings of Lorenz’s research

A

The incubator group followed Lorenz and the control group followed the mother, even when they were mixed up.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What did Lorenz conclude

A

The geese displayed imprinting where they follow the first moving object they see. Lorenz identified a critical period, where they will not attach themselves to a mother figure if imprinting doesn’t occur.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Describe Lorenz’s case study

A

He had a peacock born in a reptile house in a zoo where imprinting occurred. The peacock only directed courtship behaviour towards tortoises (sexual imprinting)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the procedure of Harlow (1958)

A

He tested the idea that a soft object serves functionally as a mother. He reared 16 monkeys with two wire model mothers that dispensed milk. In one condition the model was covered in cloth and the other it was just wire.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Describe the findings of Harlow (1958)

A

Monkeys preferred soft model, regardless of whether it dispensed milk. This displays that contact-comfort is more important than food.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Evaluate animal studies of attachment

A

Difficult to generalise to humans
Lorenz’s observations opposed by later research, Guiton et al found that chicken imprinted on gloves tried to mate with gloves but later learnt to mate with chickens.
Theoretical value- important to understand mother-infant attachment- importance of early relationships for social development
Practical value- social work
Ethical issues- monkeys suffered

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Discuss attachment in terms of primary and secondary drives

A

Hunger seen as primary drive- innate, biological motivator. We are motivated eat to reduce the hunger drive
Sears et al (1957) suggested that as caregivers provide food, attachment is a secondary drives as it associated with the satisfaction of the primary drive of hunger

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Evaluate the learning theory of attachment

A

Counter evidence from animal research- Harlow and Lorenz argue food is not necessary for attachment
Counter evidence from human research- Schaffer and Emerson- babies develop primary attachment with bio mother when other carers did most feeding.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Define internal working model

A

The mental representations we all carry of our attachment to our primary caregiver. It has a powerful effect on a child’s later relationships as well as their ability to be a parent. A loving, reliable caregiver helps a child develop similar relationships in the future.

22
Q

Define sensitive period

A

The time in which an attachment must be formed if it is to be formed easily. Bowlby said it was around 2 years.

23
Q

Describe Bowlby’s monotropic theory

A

Bowlby emphasised the importance of one primary caregiver, that is different and more important than other attachment figures. He believed the more time spent with this primary attachment figure the stronger the attachment. He recognised attachment was a reciprocal process. The interplay between an infant and adult attachment systems gradually builds the relationship.

24
Q

What is Bowlby’s law of continuity

A

The more consistent and predictable the child’s care, the better the attachment quality

25
Q

What is Bowlby’s law of accumulated separation

A

The effects of every separation from the mother add up.

‘Safest dose is a zero dose’

26
Q

What are social releasers

A

A set of innate ‘cute’ behaviours e.g. smiling that encourage attention from adults. Bowlby believed they activated the adult attachment system and that a mother and infant have an innate predisposition to become attached.

27
Q

Evaluate Bowlby’s monotropic theory

A

Research opposing monotropy- Schaffer and Emerson- a minority of babies could become attached to multiple figures.
Research support for social releasers- Brazleton et al found that if attachment figures did not acknowledge social releasers, infants curled up and gave up.
Research support for internal working models- Bailey et al (2007) interviewed new mothers on the quality of their attachment with their mother. those who reported a poor relationship were more likely to display a poor attachment with their own children
Socially sensitive
Underestimates the role of temperament

28
Q

Describe the Strange Situation

A

A controlled observation procedure to measure security of attachment. An infant’s behaviour is observed using a 2-way mirror in a controlled environment. Attachment was judged based on 5 behaviours: Proximity seeking, exploration + secure base, stranger anxiety, reunion.

29
Q

What were the 7 episodes of the strange situations

A

Child is encourages to explore
Stranger come in and attempts to interact with the child
Caregiver leaves child alone with stranger
Caregiver returns and stranger leaves
Caregiver leaves child alone
Stranger returns
Caregiver returns

30
Q

What were the findings of the Strange Situation

A

60-75% of British toddlers were type B- secure. They explore happily but regularly return to caregiver. Show moderate separation/stranger anxiety. Require comfort in reunion.
20-25% were Type A insecure-avoidant. Explore freely but do not seek proximity or secure base. Show little separation/stranger anxiety. Do not require comfort in reunion.
about 3% were Type C-Insecure resistant- seek greater proximity, explore less. Show great stranger/separation anxiety. Reject comfort in reunion.

31
Q

Evaluate the Strange Situation

A

Research support- Secure babies have better social outcomes/relationships. Insecure resistant have worst outcomes- bullying and mental health issues
High inter-rater reliability- 94% agreement.
Culture bound- Takahashi Grossman and Grossman
Research opposes SS- Kagan argues SS tests temperament instead of attachment style- confounding variable
Main and Solomon found another attachment style- disorganised- consists of B and C behaviours

32
Q

Describe the procedure of research into cultural variations

A

van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) conducted a meta-analysis on SS studies across different countries. 32 studies on 1990 children across 8 countries were investigated.

33
Q

What did van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) find

A

There was wide variation between proportions of attachments in different studies. Secure went from 75% in UK to 50% in China. Insecure resistant went from 3% to 30% in Israel. Insecure avoidant was most common in Germany but least common in Japan.

34
Q

Evaluate van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)

A

Large samples
Samples unrepresentative of culture- compared countries- ignored intra-cultural differences
Imposed etic
Flawed Study- measures temperament

35
Q

Define maternal deprivation

A

The emotional and intellectual consequences of separating a child from his mother (figure). Bowlby stated continuous care from a mother is essential for normal psychological development.

36
Q

Define critical period

A

Bowlby viewed the first 30 months of life as a critical period for psychological development. Separation from a mother at this time can cause severe psychological consequences.

37
Q

What are the intellectual effects of maternal deprivation

A

Abnormally low IQ
Goldfarb followed up 30 orphans to age 12. Those who went into foster care had an IQ of 96, and those who remained in the orphanage averaged 68

38
Q

What are the emotional effects of maternal deprivation

A

Affectionless psychopathy- the inability to express guilt or strong emotions for others. Prevents a person from developing normal relationships. They cannot appreciate the feelings of others and lack remorse

39
Q

Describe the procedure of Bowlby’s 44 thieves study

A

44 criminal teenagers were interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy. They were also questioned on whether they were separated from their mothers in infancy. A control group of non-criminals was created and they were interviewed for early separations

40
Q

Describe the findings of Bowlby’s 44 thieves study

A

14/44 were affectionless psychopaths. Of the 14, 12 experienced prolonged separation from their mothers in the first 2 years of their lives.
5/30 remaining thieves had had separation
In control group 2/44 had experienced separation.

41
Q

Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation

A

Poor evidence- used war orphans- traumatised- ppt variables- difficult to generalise- 44 thieves investigator bias
Counter evidence- Lewis (1954) replicated 44 thieves on a larger scale, looking at 500 young people and found prolonged maternal separation did not lead to criminality or difficulty forming relationships
Critical period more of a sensitive period- Koluchova found twins who were isolated from 18months-7yo recovered fully
Rutter claimed bowbly confused deprivation with privation

42
Q

Describe the procedure of Rutter’s English and Romanian Adoptee study

A

Rutter et al followed a group of 165 orphans adopted in the UK to test whether good care can make up for early trauma. 52 orphans adopted around the same time acted as a control group. PIES factors were assessed.

43
Q

What did Rutter find in terms of intellectual consequences

A

When orphans were first adopted they had delayed intellectual development. At age 11, recovery rates were proportional to time spent in the UK. Mean IQ was 102 for those adopted<6months, 86 for 6mo-2y and 77 for >2y.
Most children were retarded when they came to the Uk

44
Q

What did Rutter find in terms of emotional consequences

A

Outcome related to whether they were adopted before or after 6 months. Symptoms of disinhibited attachment, such as clinginess and attention seeking towards all adults were observed in children adopted> 6mo
However if they were adopted<6mo, they are unlikely to display disinhibited attachment.

45
Q

Describe the procedure of the Bucharest Early Intervention Project

A

95 children aged 12-31 months who had spent on average 90% of their lives in institutional care were assessed using SS. They also assessed a control group of 50 children who had never been in an institution.

46
Q

Describe the findings of the Bucharest Early Intervention Project

A

74% of control were securely attached.
Only 19% of institution kids were securely attached, and 65% were classified with disorganised attachment. 44% were disinhibited compared to >20% of control

47
Q

Evaluate research into the effects of insitutionalisation

A

Real life application- institutions + social care
Fewer extraneous variables than other
Romanian orphans are an extreme situation
Ethical Issues
So recent- Long term impacts not clear

48
Q

What did Kerns (1994) find

A

Insecurely attached children have friendship difficulties

49
Q

What did Myron-Wilson and Smith find

A

They assessed 196 children 7-11 using standard questionnaires for attachment type. They found Secure children were very unlikely to be involved in bullying. Insecure-avoidant were more likely to be victims and insecure resistant were more likely to be bullies.

50
Q

Describe the procedure of Hazan and Shaver

A

They analysed 620 replies to a love quiz in an American newspaper . 1st part assessed current/most important relationship. 2nd part assessed general love experiences, such as no. partners. 3rd part assessed attachment type.

51
Q

Describe the findings of Hazan and Shaver

A

56% secure, 25% insecure-avoidant, 19% insecure resistant. Secure results in good/long-lasting relationships. Avoidant- jealousy fear of intimacy.

52
Q

Evaluate research into the influence of early attachment on later relationships

A

Research Support- McCarthy- assessed 40 adult women- secure= best adult relationships
Attachment is hard to measure- most studies lack internal V
Correlation does not = causation- confounding variables can influence quality of later relationships
Self reports are conscious decisions but internal working models are not